3 ms·
It is hard to see how verifying licenses is a solvable problem, when licensing for code dependencies can be transitive. For ex - if I copy code from a GPL codeb
by thelastbender12 4y ago
It is hard to see how verifying licenses is a solvable problem, when licensing for code dependencies can be transitive. For ex - if I copy code from a GPL codebase like Linux and create a Github repository with an MIT license.
- danuker 4y agoYou should be able to choose flavors of the model trained only on public-domain code which does not require attribution, for example. But that would mean Microsoft acknowledging license violations.
- thelastbender12 4y agoSorry, to be clear, I meant even if a Github user asserts their code is public-domain/no-attribution/unlicensed, they could have lifted it off a codebase that doesn't allow it. It would be tricky for Github to establish the code was indeed original and hence their agreement with the user allows them to train their models on it.
- danuker 4y ago> they could have lifted it off a codebase that doesn't allow it Ah. But then someone else is guilty of redistributing code without permission. But you're suggesting, GitHub should implement something like ContentID but for code. Which should be cheaper (since code is cheap to analyze, while videos are much more bandwidth-intense). And this would kill two birds with one stone.